Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS
От | Christophe Pettus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AF90CC2E-E990-4E5B-BB06-EB3F423E5879@thebuild.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> On Apr 8, 2018, at 16:16, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > We don't panic that way when getting IO > errors during reads either, and they're more likely to be persistent > than errors during writes (because remapping on storage layer can fix > issues, but not during reads). There is a distinction to be drawn there, though, because we immediately pass an error back to the client on a read, buta write problem in this situation can be masked for an extended period of time. That being said... > There's a lot of not so great things here, but I don't think there's any > need to panic. No reason to panic, yes. We can assume that if this was a very big persistent problem, it would be much more widely reported. It would, however, be good to find a way to get the error surfaced back up to the client in a way that is not justmonitoring the kernel logs. -- -- Christophe Pettus xof@thebuild.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: